You are right, Pansy.

Thanks.

Hello Pansy,

Good morning, afternoon, evening,

Hmmmmmmmm
Normally I prefer to stay away from God related topics,
I do not have any answers to your question,
The reason being,
*** I am a believer ***

I am a non practising muslim,
This means I do not practice as I should
(I dont go to services when I should go)
(similar to not going to church on the day of the sabbath)
Okay, so I dont practice,
But in my heart of heart "I Believe"
so I am a believer. I believe God exists.

I read many of the replies other members have posted and have come to the conclusion, that there seems to be a mix up or misunderstanding in many of the posts....

As far as I can understand, worldy matters are being mis-interpreted into spiritual matters.

I would add more of what I feel as my personal opinions...
But as you clearly stated in your question...


So therefore I am refraining.

If I offend anyone with my reply,
Believers or Non-Believers
This was not the intention,
So please accept my apologies

Hello annie and jaan.
Thank you for your comments.

You do not come from the same religious background or belief system, but I noticed that you both made the comment on what spiritual matters are.
Yes, God is an all encompassing spiritual being, and the Most Divine and Holiest one at that, but by no means am I confining God with these two words alone.

I think the grasp of this particular concept is lost, which is why an understanding of God is lacking for some, hence the logical next step is the decision to disbelieve.
We can no more understand God by what we do not know (or do not want to know), anymore than we can understand anything else by defining it based on what cannot be conceived about it.

Jaan, i like the way you put it....
..."in my heart of heart"...

...is a good way of describing what Spirit is, in stark contrast to Body, Mind and Soul.
..everything else (words, actions, intentions, thoughts...etc) that proceeds from us (good or bad, right or wrong) has a basis in that.

-----

Welcome, prashant.

sorry tilly but speaking for my self at least. the begining of the chain is not believing. i didn't have it and lose it. i never had it. and the bits of logic are just that bits of why i don't believe.

I think everyone experience it different. No one I'd the same no matter what they believe.

Like Jaan I avoid these posting because everyone has their own belief systems and you can't push what you believe on to others.

No problem eric.
I didnt mean lost as just meaning "having then losing", it can also mean lost as in "not found". But then again, it may also signify something else completely for someone else.
Just as "believing" and "knowing" something can mean the same difference..lol...words have a way of being such, but the impact lies in the manner of assertion of what is expressed.
Thank you for clarifying.

-------

Yes Annie, that is true.
Which is also why I asked the question to begin with and after reading thru the comments and shared experiences of the posters, my understanding of the answer helps me realize certain things regarding The topic. The same answers likely has a different impact for you.

I can no more push or pander what i believe on others any more than others can force their belief on me.
For me, to understand what is not yet known is infinite. And growth proceeds with understanding.
That is why it is not a debate nor a bashing nor a converting thread. I try to refrain from that because provoking such has no purpose in real understanding.

Like I said, there is no such explicit material evidenciary proof to point beyond all doubt and reason whether God is real or not. We only have individual testimony of why He is or isn't and the personal reasons we have for being sure of it.

-----
As always, I appreciate both your inputs.

fair point. but not entirely true.

He does seem philosophical tho, in his own brand of new age religion/science mixture kind of way. He has his roots in Hinduism and seems to use that to color his philosophy on several other popular major religions and what is termed by many as pseudoscience, in order to produce a new kind of belief.

It seems like he is collecting a following for himself by writing books referencing several organized religions/belief systems by presenting his own less traditional interpretation of who he thinks Jesus is and what he projects/assumes Jesus would say in the present time.

He also does this with Muhammad. He also does this with God. He also does this with science. There is no mention about what he thinks of Allah...but i guess he considered that covered when he wrote about God...he also has books titled "life after death", "Buddha", "the thirteenth disciple".

i do wonder how much money he made be introducing this kind of new philosophy (and perhaps, soon-to-be belief?) to the general public?
but his real feeling of God existing or not, well...i think may still be questionable since it appears that he will agree to just about anything.

thank you for the research material you prompted. here are some links and excerpts.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Deepak_Chopra
As Deepak Chopra taught us, quantum physics means anything can happen at any time for no reason!
-Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth

Colbert: Are you a prophet?
Chopra: If you spell it p-r-o-f-i-t.
-��Chopra on the Colbert Report


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepak_Chopra
Chopra has been described as "America's most prominent spokesman for Ayurveda". He mixes ideas associated with quantum mechanics with Ayurvedic medicine in what he calls "quantum healing".

Chopra has described the AIDS virus as emitting "a sound that lures the DNA to its destruction". The condition can be treated, according to Chopra, with "Ayurveda's primordial sound". Taking issue with this view, medical professor Lawrence Schneiderman has said that ethical issues are raised when alternative medicine is not based on empirical evidence and that, "to put it mildly, Dr. Chopra proposes a treatment and prevention program for AIDS that has no supporting empirical data".
Chopra has likened the universe to a "reality sandwich" which has three layers: the "material" world, a "quantum" zone of matter and energy, and a "virtual" zone outside of time and space, which is the domain of God, and from which God can direct the other layers. Chopra has written that human beings' brains are "hardwired to know God" and that the functions of the human nervous system mirror divine experience. Chopra has written that his thinking has been inspired by Jiddu Krishnamurti, a 20th-century speaker and writer on philosophical and spiritual subjects.

In 2012, reviewing War of the Worldviews – a book co-authored by Chopra and Leonard Mlodinow – physics professor Mark Alford says that the work is set out as a debate between the two authors, "[covering] all the big questions: cosmology, life and evolution, the mind and brain, and God". Alford considers the two sides of the debate a false opposition, and says that "the counterpoint to Chopra's speculations is not science, with its complicated structure of facts, theories, and hypotheses," but rather Occam's razor.

In August 2005, Chopra wrote a series of articles on the creation-evolution controversy and Intelligent design, which were criticized by science writer Michael Shermer, founder of The Skeptics Society. Shermer has said that Chopra is "the very definition of what we mean by pseudoscience".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/why-god-makes-more-sense-_b_6212042.html
Why God Makes More Sense than Atheism by Deepak Chopra
excerpt:

1. Science isn't by definition anti-religious.
2. Atheists have a point when they accuse organized religion of a litany of gross failings, including crusades, jihads, and the Inquisition. But religions are human institutions prone to every human failing. Religious history is about us, not about whether God exists.
3. God can be approached without resorting to the cultural mythology of a humanized Father and Mother watching over us from Heaven. Atheists largely attack this myth, but smashing a myth doesn't mean you've smashed reality.
4. There is a rich tradition, both East and West, of an impersonal God.
5. God is the source of consciousness and all that we associate with consciousness: self-awareness, intelligence, creativity, evolution, etc.
6. The experience of God is found inside our own consciousness, not "out there" in a supernatural realm.


1. If all experience is subjective, going inward is a valid means of exploring reality.
2. In this exploration, new levels of consciousness reveal themselves.
3. At deeper levels of consciousness, perception changes radically.
4. As perception changes, so does reality itself, since nothing is real for us beyond what we can perceive in some way.
5. The conjunction of the individual mind with the source of consciousness is where God lives.


http://www.creationsmagazine.com/articles/C114/Chopra.html
HOW TO KNOW GOD
by Deepak Chopra
excerpt:

I believe that the experience of God is available to anyone regardless of their religious background or lack of it. The human nervous system is hardwired to experience God.

God is defined as infinite intelligence and therefore infinite creativity. The universe is a manifestation of this infinite creativity. Whenever we create something new in our lives, we tap into the infinite mind. The miracles that are described in every spiritual tradition are manifestations of the creativity that we have access to when we tap into "the mind of God." Einstein once said "I want to know how God thinks, everything else is a detail."

blue detail is in reference also to the conversation with mightymoe regarding Einstein's view on God

the "one answer fits all questions" answer... that way, you never need to ask any questions,you already know the answer is "just because, thats the way god wants it"... never has to be a rhyme or reason, because god is a mystery... seems like a weak minded, scared persons inability to try to figure it out on their own...

so why does there need to be a magical deity? whats a soul, a spirit? the questions seem to stop when the magical being comes into the answer... so half questions with half answers are good enough for some, but not for me...

the only spirits i see -

Of course he didn't see a spirit but I'll bet he feels the the effect of the spirits

I dunno about magic mushrooms...more likely deepak just likes money. He is developing and marketing himself as a brand by inventing new ideas from old ones (by bastardizing those with attractive words?) that many people seem to be buying into.

Spirituality and self love...Are you referring to your reasons or his?

-----

The questions "why", and "why not" are ones with infinite numbers of possibilities ( and probable impossibilities)

Are you saying that some people choose not to believe because they have not received satisfactory answers to "why"?

actually, the exact opposite of that... if "why" cannot be answered, some invent a magical being for all the answers to "why" ... why is the grass green? - god did it, doesn't matter why... then someone finally decided to apply some science, and found out it was chlorophyll...

i will say, i was thinking a little while ago about nature and animal - plant interactions, and some i just can't see how they happened.... when a bird eats a seed, it only digests the outer fleshy layer of the seed, where the hard shell is left with the interior intact... when the bird poops it out, it grows into a plant, and the process is started again... i know this is evolution, but i can't formulate a way this happened, like i can with other interactions... it makes a point to a creator, even tho i don't believe it...

i will say, i was thinking a little while ago about nature and animal - plant interactions, and some i just can't see how they happened.... when a bird eats a seed, it only digests the outer fleshy layer of the seed, where the hard shell is left with the interior intact... when the bird poops it out, it grows into a plant, and the process is started again... i know this is evolution, but i can't formulate a way this happened, like i can with other interactions... it makes a point to a creator, even tho i don't believe it...

Moe,this is the process of natural selection.The bird eats the seed,creates an ideal environment for the seed to thrive [(natural fertilizer,remembering that many fertilizers are made from the accumulation of bird droppings over thousands of years (guano)].The plant produces more seed so each part of the jigsaw is self perpetuating.Some people will sat this is part of Gods plan,others will say it is evolution.And so the circle continues.

yes, i understand, but it's the certain kind of seed i'm having a problem with... i cannot see the process in how the plant developed a seed that way, strictly from a science standpoint, where i can see how a creator theory developed from the same interactions...

When you can tell me which came first,the chicken or the egg,then I'll answer your question

lol... god did it

Yipee my first convert

or a better answer, more fitting to religion, "god did it - it doesn't matter why, don't question god..."

The chicken had to come first, who would keep the egg warm?